May they never have wives.
But fr, one of the things I’ve found interesting is how many men want a partner to the point of distress, but have batshit expectations of her, compared to how many women I’ve known who casually are interested in having a man but have hard limits as to what they’re willing to put up with and would much rather be single than put up with a shitty guy. And in response to this the same men who are functioning as worse than nothing options, are increasingly expecting more and more out of women.
When I look at this as a market problem I come to the opposite conclusion as these young men: that men should consider obeying their wives.
But yeah violent misogyny must be met with feminism with teeth. We will not go back.
Apart from the fact that this is reported by The Guardian. It is important to highlight that it is not just a “gen Z” problem. This is yet another battle against the generations - and the fact is, gen alpha also has this problem.
It is baffling how yet again, people are needlessly correlating problems to a particular minority. Problems as a result of precise indoctrination, crafted by our glorious leaders and corporations. The fascism within our lives impacts everyone no matter the age.
So honestly who’s fault is it to enable such widespread fascism in the first place? Our whole ecosystem is basically fascists in disguise, technology crafted to indoctrinate people from their infancy and punish those which stray away.
This is a problem which disregards the root problem and shifts it all on meaningless “generations”. Growing up with fascist made technology essentially puts you on the fascist training programme. Of course, even if you didn’t - majority of the time they will leave you no other choice than to obey.
Luckily their suicide rate is higher. I used to think if the left changed its messaging to boys things would have played out better, but I see no hope of that.
Abort your male fetuses
Hey look an essentialist pissant who doesn’t know what social factors are. How’s that spot next to the likes of Rowling? Ah who am I kidding youre probably incapable of introspection meaning my insults and flyts are wasted on ya.
Do you got a solution? Or are we just going to flood them with more ‘man bad’ buzzwords tonkeep pushing them away? These people are going to get us killed and there is no solution.
Abort yourself, fuckstick.
I think I just figured out why I can’t decide if I’m pansexual or finsexual. It’s because so many masculine looking guys my age are assholes, so my brain just assumes that all masculine looking guys my age must be assholes, so I’ve been nearly entirely turned off to all masculine looking guys. I know that good men exist, but it seems like they are few and far between so I tend to just avoid men altogether unless they are gender nonconforming. So basically I’ve limited myself to femboys and wlw, but I would date a masculine looking guy if he happened to be one of the few who aren’t assholes, it’s just that they’re hard to find.
I also live in a small rural area though, so there’s probably a higher percentage of misogynistic assholes here compared to the cities but idk.
Remember that media gives voice to the minority to get clicks, not to inform you.
The difference may be that I live in a city, but almost all people I’ve come across in my life are genuinely good people. It’s hard to imagine that people like Andrew Tate or Nick Fuentes live in the real world. I like to think of it as a separate online world since people like that are few to come by.
To be fair, I don’t go out much, but that’s partly because I’m in the middle of nowhere and there’s like nothing out here. On dating apps the men I see pretty much always have their political views set to conservative or moderate.
I did go to a bar in the cities once and I did meet a guy I liked there but nothing ever came of it. I do get the impression that men in the cities are likely much better than where I live, but I haven’t spent much time in the cities though.
I am also thinking about when I was in highschool, specifically a yeehaw highschool, and my impression was that most guys would rather eat crayons than pay attention in class. Those guys also had loser flags on their trucks despite us being in a northern union state, and there were a lot of them. Though I did have some guy friends who were chill, I felt like they were in the minority.
The older I get, the more I think that the internet was a mistake. It had a lot of potential for good and has delivered on that in many ways, but it has also unleashed an uncontrollable onslaught of radicalization, hatred, isolation, and mental illness. It’s harms have outweighed the good by orders of magnitude.
Lots of things are fine when they are first introduced because we carry our lived experiences into it. But those who grow up with the new thing shaping their lived experience don’t bring that perspective to it.
This is going to be very true for AI.
Thanks for putting it in such concise words.
I am an embedded developer so the LLM/AI is a omni-present talking point and one of my friends was saying that he loved LLMs because they could generate big chunks of code and he can go through it after and fix the mistakes.
He has the skills to fix the issues because he has a decade of non-LLM experience.
But someone that doesn’t have that experience will have a hard time finding the correct fix when the vibe code isn’t working as it should. They will rely on LLM telling them that they were right, so here is a new fix that doesn’t fix the issue.
I have such a hangup on this. Currently, a “tech journalist” in one of the big newspapers in my country is doing a series of articles about how he’s vibe coded an app that, apparently, has been green-lighted by the IT department and is very useful for his fellow journalists.
He admits to not being able to read or write a single line of code, and describes what he does as “leading a team” where he makes decisions about what kind of features to implement, when things are too slow and need speed improvements, etc. Apparently, this web-app is now 66 000 lines of code, and used in production (unclear what it’s actually used for). The LLM agents take care of everything from writing the code to setting up PR’s, reviewing, testing, and deploying.
I can’t help but see so painfully clearly that he’s created 66 000 lines of liability, that he has exactly zero concept of potential bugs in, and which no human in the world is likely to fix quickly if production goes down. He has no idea whether database rollbacks are safe or even possible if something is corrupted… there’s just so many foot canons waiting to go off. And this is just 66k lines. That’s not even a small web-app, it’s tiny (this guy can’t see the difference between generated files and written files, so I’m assuming 66k includes everything), and my personal experience is that LLM agents just get worse as complexity increases.
The biggest problem is that it’s painfully clear that this guy is oblivious to all the above. He’s happily chugging along as long as this looks like it’s working. I can only assume that other people with his level of experience (that is, none) see it the same way.
I agree to a certain extent, but also would point out that the longer something exists, the more likely it is to be exploited by capital and then just be objectively worse. A lot of the good things are still there, just pushed aside and hidden by people with ulterior motives. Plenty of queer youth still find a lot of community and comfort online when it’s absent in their lives. There is definitely something to be said about how things shape people vs how people shape things though.
The internet is just a way to get a message across. Overall, Gen Z (and further ones) are fucked in pretty much every aspect. No money, no housing and generally no real future. That leads to desperation and as a result you start asking yourself questions why up until the 1970s everyone had it better than the previous generations and now we’re constantly getting fucked. Then come the “saviors” of the internet that blame it on illegal aliens, women having rights etc because according to their logic we had it good in the 70s so we must reverse everything back to the way it was in 70s. If young people get some breathing room the trend will reverse itself in my opinion. But seeing as no one is coming to save young people, it will only get worse.
Then come the “saviors” of the internet that blame it on illegal aliens, women having rights etc because according to their logic we had it good in the 70s so we must reverse everything back to the way it was in 70s.
The problem isnt just the “saviors” and their message. Those people have always existed, always had the same blaming strategy. The problem is that the internet has made it easier for those messages to reach a global audience, has made the messenger faceless and unaccountable and given the presumption of legitimacy, has made it easier to get absorbed into isolated communities saturated in this kind of messaging, and made it easier to warp the worldview of the community to something antithetical to reality. If you run into a dude saying wacky shit in a bar, and he just seems to be some drunk asshole, you’re not likely to give him much credence against all of the other messaging around you. But if you find an entire community saying the things he says, and they welcome you in, and you get a sense of comradery and purpose from it, that same messaging holds a lot of sway over you.
Isolation has always been the secret sauce to radicalization. Exposure is the antidote. Humans have always had cultural feedback loops that reinforce a specific worldview. And meeting with other cultures often causes conflicts when those worldview collide. The promise of the internet was a more global culture wherein we have a shared reinforced world view. But that didn’t really happen for everyone. What we are seeing now is that same feedback loop phenomenon in a digital space, but often with dramatically different worldviews, even within the same local physical space. That still causes conflict when those communities collide, both online and in the real world, but now that conflict happens everywhere, even in your own household sometimes.
We’re losing physical communities, friends and family for our online echo chamber communities. People are definitely driven more into those digital communities as their physical life is more of a struggle financially, socially, etc. Relieving those struggles would certainly go a long way in remediating the problem, but it won’t go away.
1000% agreed.
100% agree. The weaponization of information has made the dumbest people not only dumber, but just outright worse humans than they would have ever been.
One of my Gen Z colleagues described a conversation they had with their wife wherein she said “you’re my best friend”, and he responded with “I’m not your friend I’m your husband”. I bet that made her feel good.
Did you call him a douche?
You should have
Idk, dipshit feels more appropriate. “Hey dipshit, sometimes you have to pay attention to the meaning over the words when your wife is expressing how she feels about you”
To be clear, anyone who endorses this view is not a person. At best, they’re a human animal, and at worst they’re rabid.
a) you’re using “animal” like an insult. That’s not cool.
and b) calling shitty people “not people” isn’t cool either.
and c) just to reiterate, by contrast, animals (human or not) are people, and calling them “subhuman” is just… dude.
– Frost
Some part of this is the male influencers, and some part of this is kids being ignorant. But being a straight woman in that age group must really suck.
There is no better proof that one doesn’t choose their sexuality than the existence of cisgender heterosexual women. I mean, hell, transgender heterosexual women, good luck to them, holy fuck.
I’m starting to think that being a straight woman just sucks at any point in time, because young men are not the smartest ones on the block. Today’s young women, though, realize that there’s an off ramp.
Even 100 years ago there was social pressure on young men to learn how to behave properly. Being kicked out of the local church meant that you couldn’t hang with your friends and would probably have to leave town.
Today, you can spend 20 hours a day online, hearing exactly what you want to hear.
I’ve heard this content classified as “traditional” but what I’ve seen of the manosphere+friends is something else truly terrifying. It’s a mix of cult-like masochism and rhetoric you’d expect of a mass shooter or bomber; and it’s public and widely-viewed, liked… I grew up Catholic and in “traditional values”. This stuff goes beyond “woman is the home-maker” and “a family is a man and a woman”; to “women are sex slaves and property that men dominate”. It sounds like the ideology of some vile hentai, and perhaps that’s where it comes from.
Hell…, some of this rhetoric IS from mass-killers. The New Zealand mosque shooter was inspired by “Great Replacement Theory” at a time where that ideology was relegated to niche crevices of 4chan. Now extremist racist/incel beliefs are a core part of the platform of UK Reform, USA MAGA, German AfD, and general pronatalist ideology. And those parties are rising or seized power.
Someone was talking about online sports betting.
The pointed out that it’s aimed at young men who like sports anyway. Now they have a toxic and addictive app running 24/7.
Ah yes, the kids these days are missing out on the church-provided misogyny, that’s the issue.
So, Gen Z males are three times as likely as baby boomers to remain single?
Pretty much. Voluntary incels.
https://www.npr.org/2025/05/22/nx-s1-5166115/politics-dating-gen-z-millennials-boomers-poll
There is 1 single problem with this survey: it centers on the average among different parts of a world instead of showing the percentage for each country or region clearly. This actually twists the perception of data, since in some countries religion and traditions are stronger or simply more citizens exist. Moreover, in a single big country like the US each state is a like a separate mini country what also makes data more mixed.
I personally would like to see something like a map of temperatures for each country before judging the situation.
The study has each country listed out. It’s just the press releases that don’t. The study didn’t break out each age cohort for each country. That can be inferred but there are likely a few surprises, and the bias you mention from cultural groups with a larger population
Here’s the comment with the study link:
https://mander.xyz/comment/25666102
Here’s an example:
Thank you! I’ve commented in another post how bad the survey is, glad to see I’m not the only one
It found that gen Z males (born 1997-2012) were twice as likely as baby boomer men (born 1946-1964) to have traditional views on decision-making within a marriage, with just 13% of men in the older cohort agreeing that a wife should always obey her husband. Among women, 18% of gen Z and 6% of baby boomers agreed.
Hmmm okay… So the author states that gen z women are three times more likely to adopt these conservative viewpoints, which means they are being converted at a higher rate than men.
“I think there are a lot of grievances, a lot of fear of men losing social positions,” Chung said. “And there’s a vacuum that’s being filled with rhetoric and voices which are trying to pitch young men against gender equality, against young women, against migrants.”
Such an opportunity for an interesting article examining why, but of course they completely gloss that over and frame it as men being egotistical and gullible.
This seems to be the press release from one of the groups that did the study:
https://www.ipsos.com/en-uk/almost-third-gen-z-men-globally-agree-wife-should-obey-her-husband
At the bottom is a download button with extra data analysis and their methodology but here is a direct link:
FFS don’t share journalism that summarises a study without linking to it
You appear to be linking to my own (later) comment
I separated them because to me they are different (related) points and I don’t particularly enjoy seeing people make multiple points when I only agree with one of them. I was also curious how many people agreed we shouldn’t be linking journalism that doesn’t link to the original study
And how likely are they to be single? This idea is appealing to husbands but I don’t see Gen Z wives hopping on board with this idea.
18% are, as per the article.
Ok that’s really concerning because it means far right messaging is increasingly hitting girls, who had previously not been as hit by it.
If anything, Gen Z to-be-wives are more independent and self-realising than any generation before. And I’m all for it.
Depends on the culture. If girls are taught the same and/or don’t have a say in who they marry, these dudes are gonna get their portion of 'tang
I just wanna be a house husband.
